User talk:MichaelQSchmidt/Archive 009

News

right I started The Korean Wedding Chest. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC) Yes, the purpose of this message is mostly to post the cool lego animation...

User:MichaelQSchmidt/workspace/cast crew

The page User:MicaelQSchmidt/workspace/cast crew for article consideration has been moved to User:MichaelQSchmidt/workspace/cast crew for article consideration Skier Dude (talk) 06:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

An easy one

User:ThaddeusB/Admin coaching/MichaelQSchmidt/Assignment2 --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Coaching update

I have completed several more sections of your review and added assignment 3. Enjoy :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Afd nomination of XpanD

Although I have done some editing of XpanD, I actually am the one who nominated it for deletion. Ironic that I would be reported of that. :)

Although I have removed most of the definite false information from that article, I still think that it should be deleted, for the reasons that I have given in the deletion debate.

Another note: With the article LCD shutter glasses, there has been an ongoing spam problem where from time to time advertising has been added for XpanD. Some of this has been quite blatant -- for example, take a look at this edit. Yeah, right.

Since no one else has commented in the deletion debate -- and it's been almost a week -- I need some help in getting the community's consensus on whether or not the article XpanD should be deleted. Angel Cupid (talk) 08:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Something that might interest you

Started this. Blogs say it will be aired on HBO at some time and sold via DVD. I would like to see it. ^Bongo_matic 07:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

It has my eyes and ears. And thank you. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 09:28, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

All I wanted (not expecting your fingers unless the spirit moves you). ^Bongo_matic 09:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Casanovva (film)

Should this be G4d again? I know you were working on this on your sandbox but I can't find that link. Here's the last AfD. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 16:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I had been holding onto it because of an announced April 6 start date and was going to myself return it when filming was confirmed. Them I found out that the film was pretty much cancelled [1]. However, and while Andrews wishes to shoot it in Capetown in 2010 [2], his wishes for the film have yet to be translated into reality. While mention of the on-again off-again film might merit a mention in the director's article, it has remained speculation. And since so many are so willing to rewrite and re-introduce the article even without it being filmed, I realized there was no need to continue holding on to the earlier version. This current version is different from the earlier article, but shares that same name. Fritzpoll might undelete the sandbox [3] if you'd like to compare versions. I suggest a polite AfD as crystal. In looking at the infobox, I see informations that can in no way be confirmed, as running time of an unmade film is complete speculation... just as is a budget when there is no confirmed investors. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 18:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casanovva (film)

I manually added the old AFDs, so this should solve your concern, correct? MrKIA11 (talk) 20:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely super! Thank you very much. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 20:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could help. MrKIA11 (talk) 20:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Help and advice on article

Hi, Michael! Thanks so much for your help on improving and saving the Trans (film) article. I'm writing another article about pedal steel guitarist, Curly Chalker and was wondering if you had time to look it over and give me some advice / pointers. I really appreciate it!

Timothyapetty (talk) 15:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

In case you need a laugh

In a long rant which probably isn't worth reading otherwise, User:A Nobody accidentally implied you are a porn star. "DGG and I are adults with PhDs and MichaelQSchmidt is an adult film star." --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:03, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I can sympathyze some with A Nobody, and he actually has my respect for having the strength of will to avoid the mess at the RFC about him. I do hope the TLDR venting above helps him remain cool. But the inadvertant word choice adult film star? Yikes! All three words are accurate, and it is worth a chuckle... though he might have better included the word and, as in an adult AND film star. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 04:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

statistics

I think there were, but I haven't done a statistical analysis. This event is able to be precisely timed, and is widely acknowledged as factual, so I'm able to talk about it without coming across as a whiner. It's not really in my best interest to discuss any others, so I'm not all that eager to convince myself they exist. That's the path to becoming a bitter conspiracy theorist.—Kww(talk) 02:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes there is no right answer. All one can do is persevere. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 02:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Blood Sweat and Wars

Thanks for your note Michael and the work on the sources. I made the rookie error of relying on Google for sources (an error that I commonly harp on others for doing at AfD) and agree with you completely on your interpretation of notability. Sincere thanks for your due diligence -- Samir 00:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I followed up on the sources at the film's website and did some digging for news regarding the principals and the director. Sadly, Google's weakness is showing. Apparently the subject matter is a controversy in Galway, as the director has been assaulted and has received death threats for wishing to make the film. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 01:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikinews

No insult was taken. I had simply thought that you might not be aware of the policies that Wikinews has that help make it reliable. Also, if someone did criticize a project someone was a member of, I don't see how the individual would have a right to be insulted. JoshuaZ (talk) 05:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

RFA spam

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 19:10, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Kirti Chakra (film) / Kirtichakra

Hmmm. No wonder the google search didn't throw up anything usable! I've never encountered a predicament like this before- what does one do? Await the outcome of the AfD? HJMitchell You rang? 03:25, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

It ocasionally happens that a well-meaning editor authors an article about a subject that already exists under a different name and does not catch his own duplication. A bold redirect would have been the thing, had you known about the original article. No harm, no foul. Perhaps an admin can do the common sense close and redirect at this point, as there is no need to continue the AfD. I wanted to check in with you first before asking one to do just that. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 07:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Asked here. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 07:33, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I see it's been taken care of. Good work. One last question, though! Which title is correct? From what I can see the film is named after Kirti chakra (an award for valour), thus Kirti chakra (film) would seem sensible. Where has it ended up? Not, I suppose, that it matters too much as long as there's a redirect there. Always a pleasure to be working with you, HJMitchell You rang? 16:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Some Indian sources list it as both Kirti chakra and Kirtichakra. IMDB (a place where many look for film information) lists it as Kirti Chakra. However, ThadduesB found that Keerthi Chakra was an even beter title match. Nice looking out. Since it has coverage under both, the new redirects are likely the best option do readers can find it both ways. However, please keeo in mind that English translation of Indian films are often phonetic and under different spellings. T's become TH's or TH's become T's... I's become EE's or and EE'd become I's... S's are TH's or TH's are S's... sometimes R's become RR's... always quite confusing. I've found that in checking for sources for Infian films, I always have to double-check under all sorts of possible spelling combinations... oh... and when you come across the fact that Indian cinema keeps using the same titles for dozens of different films by different directors with different actors and in different languages.... YIKES. Feel free to ask for input anytime you come across another such. I'm always glad to help.

And on a side note in reference to User:HJ Mitchell/Sources, and as much as it pains me to say, there is a slight (and heated) consensus that IMDB is not a proper RS... though it is suitable for an EL and for use in further research. You'll find my own thoghts at the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Citing IMDb. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 18:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Well as long as all plausible search terms are redirected, it doesn't make any odds which exact title is used! I've heard of the consensus on IMDb but, frankly, RS or not, it can be very useful. The list is old, really, I should do something with it- I created it for reference when I was researching bilateral relations articles etc when all that was going on a few months ago. I'm not so active these days so I haven't looked at in a while! HJMitchell You rang? 19:18, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

You may enjoy THIS... a project I have been tinkering with for a while. Always love fresh eyes looking in. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Alex Jones

Hi, I noticed you created Endgame (2007 film) by Alex Jones. I just created an Alex Jones filmography template for future articles Template:Alex Jones. Any comments on it? Any input for improvment is appreciated.  Burningview  ✉ 19:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Please don't blame that article on me (chuckle). It was created in March 2009 by User:Oakbokken [4]. However, and no matter my personal opinion about the film one way or the other, when I saw it was up for deletion I researched to find if it met inclusion criteria or not. It did, so I gave the artcle some improvements and am arguing for its "keep" at the AfD. However, and whether I agree with his philosophies or not, my research has found numerous sources that show notability for Jones as well. So yes, I'll look in at the artilce about him and offer advice. As for the template, it looks fine to me.... but I'm no template expert. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 19:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello: Nice work on adding citations and properly formatting them. I'm copying your style at the Oath Keepers article I'm working on. I saw the template and it looks awesome. Even if all those article can't be written it is a nice overview of the films Alex Jones has produced. Question: how sure are you that that is Alex Jones' proper filmography? IMDB doesn't really give a proper filmography. Where did you get it from? Varks Spira (talk) 20:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Can I pick your brain?

Having copyedited an article, another editor has approached me with a question and, embarrassingly, I can't answer it, but I hoped you might know the answer. The user is struggling to get his article promoted to GA status because some of the references do not have retrieval dates. Thus, I wondered if you knew how to put them in since it's something I've often wondered about myself! Thanks in advance, HJMitchell You rang? 20:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Easy answer... Have the editor look at the article's history to determine just when the references he is unsure of were actually added. That would be the retrieval date. He can then add "|accessdate=Year-Month-Day" MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 20:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Much obliged. As always! HJMitchell You rang? 20:52, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not completely happy with MQS' answer there. When you enter a retrieval date, it's supposed to be the date you yourself accessed the content and verified that the source supports the article wording. There is no particular way (beyond normal trust in other editors) to know when exactly the original author accessed a source, or even if they actually did. I would advise against filling in those fields as an exercise in "box-ticking" to achieve a GA rating. If someone else checks the source and finds it faked or misinterpreted, it will cast the "other editor" in a bad light which could stay with them for quite some time on-wiki. Remember too that there is always the Wayback Machine to find old copies of web pages, in which case you fill in the archiveurl= and archivedate= parameters and accessdate= becomes today! Franamax (talk) 21:04, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough Dad... and I just made a note about refTool on HJ's page. My initial suggestions was so that the editor might honor the original retrieval date of the original ref-submitting editor. But yes, a "re-retrieval" date would better reflect the new editor's work and his verification of the ref he is fixing. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 21:10, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Aaron Krach

I see that you did a lot of great work on the article about me/my work. I'm wondering if I can help you by sending you any links, references or footnotes? aaron krach

\\--Aaronkrach (talk) 17:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I would rather that you did not, as such specific assistance from the subject might be considered by the community to reflect a conflict-of-interest, however well-intended. If non-blog, non self-published news sources and articles about the subject of any article exist, then diligent search by interested editors will find them. If you have not done so yet, please read and review the content of WP:COI to see how the Wikipedia community deals with even hints of COI. It essentially boils down to Wikipedia is not about self-promotion or even the preception of self-promotion. However, now that the article is now here and no mater who wrote it, it now belongs to the Wikipedia community, and it will receive whatever attention it needs. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 18:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

--198.185.164.128 (talk) 16:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC) So sorry. I thought to offer. But I completely understand the awkwardness. I will definitely stay away from the article. I have been a writer for years... but I can see there is so much to learn about Wikipedia. -Aaron Krach

I appreciate the offer, but thank you for understanding. And oh... don't forget log in and then to use 4 tilde AFTER a comment. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:28, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

A funny combo

MQS, you really should watch the context of your edit summaries...as displayed here. Cheers.--kelapstick (talk) 18:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Tough to undo when one hits submit, but yes, you are correct... my sumary would have better as something like "rspns" or "cmnt". Thanks. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 19:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It was actually the full sentance combined with the previous section's heading that I found more ammusing than anything else, "Can I pick your brain?: no thank you... but thanks for offering". There was certainly nothing wrong with your edit summary, I just found it funny. Cheers.--kelapstick (talk) 19:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the history, I have to agree. As the editor whom I was answering placed his offer within a section of another editor's question, I created a new section... but should have done it first, THEN answered. Glad to share smiles. Like the time someone called me an "an adult film star" when they intended "an adult AND film star". I'm still chuckling of that humorous fauxpaux. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait, you mean that you are not and adult film star? I love dangling modifiers, another thing that you can do is remove the text in the edit summary line before you add your new one, such as when editing this section it starts with /* Aaron Krach */ . What happened to your awesome signature. Now it's boring like mine! --kelapstick (talk) 19:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh... I had hit a reset-to-defaults in my preference section. I meant to correct the sig. Now that you have reminded me, I can do it now. Best, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Back to a favored sig Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thumbs up.--kelapstick (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Black Field

I guess it's arguably notable, I suggest you ask at DRV. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I did post the same question with the closer, but appreciate your answer. I do not wish to go to DRV because there was absolutely no problem or issue with the June close. It was fully proper. But that commenting editors felt that notability might be better to ascertain once the film was released, was why I asked it to be usefied. Do you really think I need argue thatthe clusure was somehow incorrect? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

No, not at all, but it's probably best to get other opinions. Maybe ask at peer review? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense. But I first and formost wished to show my respect for your proper nomination of the original article, as was pretty sad at that time. I do not want to step on any toes, as everything done last June was proper. But with time having definitely changed the circumstances.... and as it now has sourcing now that was not available last June, what I were to be simply return it to mainspace? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I would not oppose. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Quite gracious... and so will not unneccessarily burden others. I would be unhappy if the very act of asking for input might somehow be seen as canvassing (which is why I have limited by questions herein to only you and the closer}. Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

No, not at all. I think it's quite appropriate. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 00:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Stalker

Just to let you know that I think someone has been trying to impersonate and/or discredit you. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:MichaelQSchmidt2009, in which I just had to indefinitely block as a vandalism-only account. Regards, MuZemike 07:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Just saw and commented over at ANI. I appreciate your quick work. Any need to visit over at WP:UAA? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Nope. That entry was removed automatically the second I blocked the account. MuZemike 07:11, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi … I was going to ping you about this, but I see that it's already been resolved. :-) Happy Editing! — 138.88.125.101 (talk · contribs) _{07:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)}

I suppose I have been fortunate. It could have been worse. Thank you, both. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I forget to thank you? ..

MichaelQSchmidt ,Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

new stub

Hi Michael--can you make something of this, Paul Edney? Thanks, and take care, Drmies (talk) 21:15, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks do-able. Will take a crack at it when I return home in a few hours. Thanks for sending it my way. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

On further inspection, I feel I have to reverse myself. The man has been a number of films... but unnamed extra rarely makes one notable... and there are a bunch of uncrediteds. I cannot find RS that shows notability for his work, as much of it as there is. I'll keep digging in the morning, but do not feel much hope. Sorry. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:54, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

As long as you're helping bacon eaters... although the subject is noted in many sources and seems very notable to me, I'm having trouble finding good sources with substantial discussion and coverage of the issues raised by the subject of human disguise. Do you have any suggestions? ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll look as well. remember, even if a source is not in-depth, as long as it is not trivial, it adds toward notability. Keep looking under "human suit". Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

• I have a suggestion: drop it and let it be deleted! No prejudice against recreation! Muzzle all the 'keep'-voters! Drmies (talk) 03:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you think it's notable Doc? ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Barnstars

Thanks for the barnstar MQS. Much appreciated. Have a great weekend. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:22, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for mine to, im not sure i deserverd it for my tiny efforts, but it was very welcome! FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome

That's been the standard reply that I've seen for a long time now. It wouldn't surprise me, however, to see one of the people complaining about the Razzies to disagree with me, though I don't know why. Some things just don't fall under a given policy! Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:ENT

I tried to follow your argument for notability inherited from being in films etc. but I couldn't follow the logic. Could you clarify your statement please? -- Stillwaterising (talk) 04:57, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Not from just being in films... but from having significant roles in multiple notable films. Please look at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#WP:ENT. The essay WP:INHERITED, part of the essay collection WP:ATA, is usually used in discussions where one hypothetical editor might say "He's the nephew of a notable person, so he must be notable"... and the other editor will reply, "No... the notability of the Uncle does not rub off on the nephew. The nephew must be notable on his own." What WP:ENT it is stating is that if an actor has indeed performed multiple significant roles in notable productions, his work as a part of that production allows a presumption of notability. An essay like WP:INHERITED is advice or opinion that may or may or may not reflect community will... and anyone can write an essay that some may or may not agree with... However, a guideline such as WP:ENT, as part of WP:BIO, is explicitly endorsed by community consensus. You may seek further input at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#WP:ENT. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:25, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter

The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Reed Cowan

This user played a significant role in helping Reed Cowan graduate from incubation.

Nice work on Reed Cowan. I have graduated it & accessed it as a B-class article. I also reorganized it slightly in order to remove some duplicate info. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I had added many of those sources only minutes before the original deletion... and unfortunately editors who had earlier questioned the notability, had not had an opportunity to review the changes and comment on them. The closer made a good-faith call... though I myself would have relisted so the more recent changes could be evaluated. Thanks again for your assist. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Game Show Congress

I don't think I was ever a contributor to that article, but yep, I know it deserves good sourcing so anything you can find would be helpful. Cheers, Robert K S (talk) 02:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.... just wanted permission to work on it as it sits in your userspace. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yes, thank you very much. BTW, the TRASH article was userfied for me as well (though you didn't notice it). Robert K S (talk) 13:50, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You have new messages at Mazca's talk page.
Message added 20:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

~ mazca ^talk 20:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Yesterday Was a Lie

Hello Michael. If you have ideas for cleaning up this article, why not make a draft of your proposal on the article talk page? Somebody who doesn't have a COI can take care of the actual editing of the article. Also, if you do have any personal knowledge of the film, you can use that to tell us if you see mistakes in the current version. EdJohnston (talk) 04:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Will do. Might I let the stew over the COI, Socks, and puppets die down first (chuckle)? There is more going on there than meets the eye. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:57, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

David Yewdall

Hey Michael, do you think there's enough to this guy to get a DYK? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Heck yes... I just added his Emmy nomination and took a look at G-News and G-Books before comenting on the article's talk page [5] Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I knew I could count on you... BTW, if you're wondering how I got to him, check out Battle Beyond the Stars. Can't wait for that to make it to the top of my queue. Actually, I probably won't live long enough. Drmies (talk) 03:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Prom Night in Mississippi

Hey Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.}, I was listening to Q this morning on my way into work, and Jian Ghomeshi (do you remember Moxy Früvous? Did they make it this far south? Once I Was the King of Spain? On a side note you should check out his interview with Bill Bob Thorton, quite amusing, Q is a pretty good daily radio show that he now hosts, but I digress) and Morgan Freeman were talking about Prom Night in Mississippi, it sounded interesting so I wrote an article about it (it had actually been speedied in July as a copyvio). Anyhow, as my resident film go-to-guy, I thought you might want to take a look, and clean up the monstrosity that I created, muahahahahaha, :| Also, I don't get much editing done on the weekend, and I will be tied up Monday, so I might not get a chance to DYK it, so if you wanted to take a stab at that it would be appreciated (you or any of the talk page stalkers that you have, you know who you are...) It is actually DYKable now at over 2,000 characters, I looked for an image of the school but couldn't find one on Flickr, maybe in your spare time you could drive to Charleston, Mississippi and take one for me? No? OK. Anyway thanks in advance, have a great weekend! Cheers. --kelapstick (talk) 00:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Will see what I might do. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Much thanks. Cheers. kelapstick (talk) 04:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Doing some work on it even now. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:25, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Did some cleanup and re-arranging of informations to give the article a better flow. You want to source those awards... or shall I? Now I'm gona look for a few of the reviews to expand the recognition section. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Lots of terrific reviews in numerous reliable sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Lots of articles about the film in numerous reliable sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You go ahead if you don't mind, most of my weekend work is done on an iPod, so content contributions don't happen. I have to see what you added still. Thanks again. And don't worry about the talkback template, I have you watchlisted. kelapstick (talk) 05:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I just nominated it for DYK, if you want to put in an alternate hook, feel free, I wanted to work Morgan Freeman into it, but couldn't figure out how to within 200 characters, and I am pressed for free time these days. Cheers and thanks.--kelapstick (talk) 18:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll do some expansion and further sourcing today.

DYK ALT hook: ... that the film Prom Night in Mississippi was based upon the the first interracial prom in Charleston, South Carolina, itself funded by Morgan Freeman?

Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

←For some reason it didn't add your name when I nominated it...not sure why. I re-added you as creator, feel free to add that alt if you want...I am outta here. Cheers.--kelapstick (talk) 00:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I also added ... that the documentary film Prom Night in Mississippi was based upon the the first integrated prom in Charleston, South Carolina, which occurred in 2008 and was funded by Morgan Freeman?

I think that the 2008 is a rather interesting detail, it adds some pow factor. Another day with the CEO on site here, so I will be tied up again for most of the day. Cheers.--kelapstick (talk) 16:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Great minds.... great minds. I was actually adding such myself when my system went into lockup (too many windows open at once). I'll continue with expansion in a critical reception section, as the film had its detractors as well as its admirers. Good balance. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

RfA (again)

A recent one of these reminds me - isn't it about time you had a go?   pablo_hablo. 22:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I have been encouraged to give it serious consideration. And so have been doing my homework and have sought coaching [6]. I sure hate drama... but perhaps you'll see my name at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/RfA Report sometime in the near future. Might you ofer any advice? Thanks for the note of encouragement. :) Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

`I noticed you were being coached. I'm no expert - I've only recently taken an interest in RfA and have followed about 6 of the discussions. But I do think that you would be a positive. I've added this to my watchlist.  pablo_hablo. 23:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Your confidence in me is assuring. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Michael, just a quickie message to say thanks for 'saving' my article on Annie Zaenen! I meant to go back and add evidence of notability, but I got too busy at work. I'm not a wikipedia regular, so I hadn't heard before about the project of saving articles, it seems to me a great idea. Thanks again! Valeria.depaiva (talk) 05:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow.... that was back in late April. You certainly do not spend much time here (chuckle). Just remember for the future to consider creating articles first in a user workspace to allow you the time to make them shine. For example, you can create one at User:Valeria.depaiva/artricle workspace. You can then feel free to get advice on article quality or assistance in moving the finished article to mainspace. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Prom Night in Mississippi

On November 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Prom Night in Mississippi, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 13:14, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I was somewhat disappointed that they didn't include the Morgan Freeman connection for the entire time [7] or that it took place in 2008. I thought those were pretty crucial pieces of information. Still 1,800 hits isn't bad. Also I responded to your sig gift on my talk page. Cheers.--kelapstick (talk) 16:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You have new messages at SpacemanSpiff's talk page.
Message added 21:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-SpacemanSpiff 21:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Another excellent job

on Lava Kusa – The Warrior Twins.   pablo_hablo. 09:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, much. I appreciate your good words. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 11:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Bongomatic/Smoker (theater)

What do you make of this? It looks a bit thin for a stand-alone article to me, but I think it is worth merging somewhere. Any ideas? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for directions

Per your advice and information relating to the DW (Dave) Drouillard article: thank you for directing me to the WP:RS and WP:V pages. Navigating Wikipedia while trying to learn the nuances is somewhat like being in a labyrinth. You have been like a Wiki GPS unit helping me find my way. Thanks, again. Darkloon (talk) 22:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

The Guard (film)

Thanks for yet another excellent rescue job. I took the liberty of removing the construction tag as I guess youre finished. Its a fascinating place Galway, intense religiosity in places like Spiddal along with energetic Bohemian types, inland a bit it has the most gorgeous forests and lakes, I hope they show some of the best places in these movies! FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries. As more information becomes available, it can be added. I appreciate your looking in. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:31, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

User:GaGaOohLaLa

Hi, apologies if this should go at the AfD thread where you brought up this user but I don't want to get off-topic. Anyhow, this user was recently brought up at ANI, thread here. It's closed now, but since you were questioning his motives, I thought it would be relevant to point out that this question was addressed and answered by him. Since the first AfD of the article has no blocked/banned users, I'm at a loss as to a possible puppet master. I think AGF is a fair solution for now, unless stronger sock evidence can be brought up. ThemFromSpace 06:58, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Understood. And I have read the ANI report... and the explanations that the user porports to have be long-time lurker in explanation of his knowledge. I think user Harleyamber might feel differently, as is is his edits of the last 6 months which have all been nominated. AGF requires that I ignore WP:DUCK. Time will tell. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

But as above, it does not require you ignore WP:TURDUCKEN. ^Bongo_matic 07:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, and with family out of town, I had turkey pizza with lots-o-gooey cheese. Yum. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm going with the ham. ThemFromSpace 07:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

That's for Easter... for Thanksgiving pizza, it has to be Turkey. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bravedog. Fences&Windows 20:53, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

poor old horse

 They say, old man, your horse will die

   (And they say so! And we hope so!)

 They say, old man, your horse will die

   (Oh poor old man!)

Traditional sea shanty

Top-notch edit summary here, they do say that if you fall off a horse you should get straight back on ...

I think it is often a problem at DRV that, although DRV is to evaluate consensus at the AfD and thus judge the admin decision (although this was in fact a speedy deletion), it's frustrating not to be able to view the article; however, if there were a way to do so, DRV would be more likely to become AfD take 2.   pablo_hablo. 22:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

With warmest respects, I find myself chuckling a bit... as DRV's almost always become AFD-revisited, no matter guideline suggestions to the contrary. It would indeed be helpful to be able to compare various versions to see if they were G4 or not, as it seems unlikely that all were so... but that thought is rendered moot.

As for the horse... getting back on a live one after falling off is one thing, and I really did not want to take a stick back to poke at the carcass of a dead one... until it was implied that my association with ARS make my opinion worth less than others' (sigh). And then it was stated that the entire series of articles were all authored repeatedly by only one person over the last 3 years. Evidence rather than assertion would be nice.

Thanks though for being a voice of reason toward possible userfication or incubation. I do sincerely hope your association with ARS members does not itself lead to a suggestion that your own opinion should somehow be minimalized, as it has been suggested of mine. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

That comment was a tad unfair, at least where you're concerned.   pablo_hablo. 19:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

@MichaelQSchmidt I really appreciated your concerns on the lightning fast 12 hours Afd for Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series If it happens to be userfied or incubated, i strongly suggest that you covers abridged anime as a broad subject rather than just Yu-Gi-Oh! abridged version. The DRV turning into Afd redux was warranted thanks to the subject & participants. In my case i found nothing "great" in the previous June 2009 Afd (Closed even before i could report my lack of findings). While there is no proof that it's the same person or group of persons creating again the same article under different names, saying that he/she/they were not aware of the article creation protection is very dubious see that. I think an article on abridged anime will eventually make it into mainspace and stay there with the irony that coverage will likely consist of criticisms of the said abridged anime. --KrebMarkt 07:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

It was the 12 hours and nothing else as I had never heard of the series before and personally care very little for that genre. I did eventually find an old version in a userspace.... and a few earlier versions in various google caches at varoius wikis... but I have no idea if they were similar or differnt from the one most recently deleted. Your suggestion that an article be created that has a wider scope makes sense. Thank you much for sharing your concerns. If this current one gets incubated, I will encourage those working on it to consider widening the scope and renaming the darn thing, as the name "Yu-Gi-Oh" with any version of the word "Abridged" sure gets a lot of disapproval. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

A broad article will have more support as it widen the potential sources to assert notability and placates "potential ego" issue meaning no idiot flaunting in the bad way about their abridged series being on Wikipedia. Animanga RS websites are aware of abridged series but clearly don't bother with them see a question on abridged anime series (CTRL+F for abridged if you don't see it). While it can't count as an evidence of notability, it nevertheless give indication on how anime critics perceive them. --KrebMarkt 21:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Deleteing an Article

Could you give me an easy guide on this subject please. Mr Hall of England (talk) 11:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no "easy guide". However, I might suggest you study WP:DEL and [WP:AFD]] for starters, with a side trip to WP:CSD. Do you have a more specific question? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)